tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860885878242248375.post497379561372108631..comments2008-09-04T07:16:02.587-07:00Comments on The Crittenden Report: Reactionaries at 10 pacesThe Crittenden Reporthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09939031370247731052noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860885878242248375.post-35380827174661789672008-07-30T01:51:00.000-07:002008-07-30T01:51:00.000-07:00As you say, this is his usual method. And a metho...As you say, this is his usual method. And a method followed by most in the media who only want their side aired. <BR/><BR/>Your view is not so much uncharitable, as accurate. We can't give him the benefit of the doubt, because it is his modus operandi and these posts show that.<BR/><BR/>Yes, at least he did give Janet Smith a go, but one suspects she got relatively short shrift.<BR/><BR/>Ms Geraldine Doogue and her bunch of merry men are very similar, although far less strident.The Crittenden Reporthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09939031370247731052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860885878242248375.post-31347455028592898942008-07-28T22:19:00.000-07:002008-07-28T22:19:00.000-07:00I had just finished reading Mary Eberstadt's "The ...I had just finished reading Mary Eberstadt's "The Vindication of Humanae Vitae" in the latest edition of First Things when I listened to this program. I was thinking what a coward Crittenden was in not giving air space to anyone of the opposite view - how uncharitable of me - when on comes Janet Smith. But he hardly gives her any chance to expound upon her points. I bet he interviewed her for an hour and half and just used the bit of the interview that suited him most. That's his usual form. It still went 90% negative. Without trying he could have found many Catholics who could easily have explained why they follow the Church's teaching and the wisdom of doing so.Schützhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05026181010471282505noreply@blogger.com